Why do some of you legitimately support monarchism...

Why do some of you legitimately support monarchism? Monarchists are the one Sup Forums sub-group that I simply can not understand. Is it just the edge factor?

Best preserves culture and religion, more or less.

What a horrible fucking thread, you don't even bother to explain what issue you have with it.

Monarchy rots one family.
Oligarchy rots a bunch of families.
Democracy rots every family.

A godly and wise monarch is GOAT.

This is what my history teacher told me . Not all monarchs are tyrannical or whatever . They are thought since they are born how to lead , How to behave in society and how to manage foreign affairs . You want someone who went to bed school to treat you but you dont want someone who studied all his life how to lead ? That's interesting isn't it


I don't support totalitarian rule but a rule in where the monarch has a say , there is a constitution and a government

He's French, is that not enough of an explanation?

Monarchy is a risky government, but I personally feel that it works out better for the country in the very long term. In the short term it can get really shitty, but now that most monarchies are less obsessed with inbreeding a lot of problems could be mitigated somewhat.

Isn't US. an oligarchy with the rockefellers, rothschilds, and the other faggots?

Wut

lol...."greatest of all time"

It is de facto, but that oligarchy is still founded on the citizens believing that they are in control, and the feeling of satisfaction and dominance that comes with voting. Violent revolutions don't happen because the citizens feel in control. And this complacency leads to the decadence we see now.

Sorry I don't speak bitch.

Not a monarchist, but I sympathise with them. Think of it like this: A democratically elected leader of a country only has responsibility over that country for the duration of time they rule it. Anything that comes after (whether a result of their policies or not) will be blamed on the current politician in power. So, in effect, they merely have to provide the illusion of prosperity, safety, national unity, etc., etc. for a few years. They also don't have a stake in the country's future other than to continue their own rule/fill their own personal coffers with wealth.
Monarchs, on the other hand, have all of the responsibility for the entire future of the country. They must keep their lands healthy and prosperous for their progeny. Any negative result of a policy/rule put forth by the monarch will not fall upon the shoulders of some random, unrelated person, but unto themselves or their children. For these reasons, they must do what is best for their country.

Keep in mind that what is best for somebody is not always what they want. In addition, what somebody needs is not merely what they need for survival. Your wants literally always leave you wanting.

Only if the royal family is for a republic kingdom.

My country got fucked in the ass and all structures went to shit when nobility gained freedom to legally not respect anything king says and every noble was able to represent the businesses of any side he got his power and money from. After that king was being elected, there was no continuity in leadership, so every person who got enough foreign aristocrats' support could shit on Poland how much and whenever he wanted to. In a Slavic country you need one strong, independent and somewhat insolent man to grab all those bumptious botched by the face. Slavic people don't need freedom, they need an ultimate leader with a goal and absolute power because they can't do anything themselves, a place where everyone is a wolf just needs an alpha.

Monarchy is not fair or good.

Even if the guy study in the best schools and have the best education in the world he still can be a fucking failure.

There are A LOT of examples in the Spanish History, and that's why this country is fucked nowadays, disgusting monarchs that had no intention of getting a better economy or a more open mind towards business.

Dictatorship do is a good way to handle things if it's well done.

China for example, is a country taken by the Communist Party and can look for the future with a straight view of things, with focus and objectives in long range, democracies can't do that since every 4-5 years we have different governments.

Botched=bitches.
Fuck my phone basically

>There are A LOT of examples in the Spanish History
Of irresponsible decadence. They reaped what they sowed.

Exactly.

But it's not just in Spain, there are examples in each and every monarchy around. Just gave Spain as a example cause that's the one I know best.

The main problem is that they had no foil. The people let it all happen. Just like they let the current shit shows happen, but now they're told they can't change it since they voted for it.

At least in Monarchy I can trust whoever our leader is was raised from birth and schooled specifically for their job.
It cuts out elections which reduces the incentives leaders have to play with lobbyists and donor interests.

Some of us believes stability is more important than your faggotry revolutionary ways. Anti monarch sentiment coming from a french faggot is a damn joke.

>Monarch equals stability of culture and state